Monitoring the monitors

Spot fixing in cricket is the story that has kicked into overdrive this week, and you cannot escape the conclusion that it will grow further next week.  Obviously, a lot of details are still supposition, and most of the detail is in-between the lines, but it has certainly raised a lot questions.

1. The New Zealand players knew that Lou Vincent was spot fixing in the ICL.  They would have told others of this.  How then did Lou Vincent keep on getting picked by Auckland, for T20 cricket no less, for seasons after that?
2. And who thought it was a good idea to have him representing Auckland in the Champions League where there is a lot of money, as well as reputation at stake?
3. Brendon McCullum is understood to have been approached by Mr XXX to spot fix, and immediately notified authorities.  This was in 2008.  What has happened exactly in terms of the investigation since then?
4. What kind of organisation conducts an enquiry at such a glacial pace?
5. Answer to the last question.  Probably the kind of organisation that thinks it’s good idea to leak a player’s confidential testimony to the UK press.  What on earth is that expected to achieve?
6. Next answer to question 4.  The kind of organisation, currently undergoing a Machiavellian  restructure that has decided that the heads of only three International Cricket Bodies should get to review and act on the final report.
7. Next answer to question 4.  The kind of organisation that is opposed to an independent inverstigation unit.

Spot fixing is a blight on the sport, and it is good that its perpetrators may be getting brought to justice.  But who is there to monitor the administrators?  Because until there is accountability and scrutiny there very little will be done.

Footnote: Was the Justin Vaughan on the news tonight saying the ICL was a completely corrupt competition any relation to the Justin Vaughan who said it was OK for Bond to play there?